It’s just incredible that the guy is in a legal battle about mishandling intelligence materials, and we’re even talking about giving him access to more of them. This country is absolute brain rot.
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
82 points (94.6% liked)
politics
19089 readers
5246 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A regular citizen would be immediately rejected for even the lowest security clearance with his history and debt. He's shown he doesn't care to protect classified information and has every reason to try to barter it for money. He's got all kinds of massive debt to foreign entities and has a pressing need to secure more funding, likely from foreign entities because US entities don't trust him with their money.
We have regular citizen Jack Teixeira getting 16 years and many say he got off easy.
Something something corruption money
Do. Not. Brief. trump.
He’s a massive security risk.
Biden already said he would when he officially becomes the nominee. It's fucking insane.
Unless it's a law, Trump shouldn't receive any security briefings until he's sitting in the office.
I'm always entertained by randos on message boards who think they can will things into existence by posting. in. staccato. tone.
Sorry. It’s just for added emphasis, and it’s less obnoxious than all caps. Exclamation points aren’t good enough!
“Mishandling” he fucking stole them and refused to return them while lying about everything and trying to cover it up. Now he’s trying to claim immunity as if he’s some kind of an infallible deity.
Rather have Katie Porter:(
I would have preferred Porter by far. But I was expecting Schiff to win and figured it was OK. Then, the way he ran the primary, I've lost so fucking much respect for the guy.
I hope they lie to him outright, see who he sells it to. You know he can’t resist.
I understand where he's coming from but this sounds like actively planning to fail to meet their obligation to brief the presidential nominee. That's not a great precedent to set, the tables could be turned in the future.
The "normal" government machine is broken. Attempting to rely on long established norms as guardrails is not something that will turn out well. "The tables could be turned" is not an argument that applies to the current state of US politics.
The Republican party literally told the Obama white house that they wouldn't even hold a hearing for his supreme Court nominee (Garland March of 2016) "because the American people needed to weigh in since it was an election year." Which many people properly identified as complete and utter bullshit.
Then Republicans went from a nomination on September 29th, 2020, to a confirmation on October 26th, 2020, of Amy Coney Barret, who I'm sure is eminently qualified for the position.
Less than a month.
The Supreme Court is effectively meaningless as an institution attempting to maintain a facade of impartiality.
The "system" as it once existed is gone now. Republicans have been waging a war on public institutions for decades and they've won. It's over.
Attempting to continue to play by the old rules doesn't do anything but multiply the effectiveness of the grift.
Why do nominees get classified information?
Transition planning, essentially. The intent is to smooth the transition of whomever wins, sooner, so they both get it.
Should be noted that most party leaders are already high ranking political officials - Senators or Governors - who routinely get briefs on security concerns at some level.
Trump's an exception largely because he's only ever won an election once. If he'd been a House Rep or Senator, particularly one with a seat on the Intelligence Committee, then he'd already be juggling documents like this daily. If he was a state governor, he'd have his own gubernatorial police and intelligence services to manage.
Is briefing presidential candidates the law, i.e. is this codifies somewhere, or is it just a thing of convenience?
They shouldn’t give him anything. Maybe some colouring books for her s assistant to do while he directs.
What, why? Are candidates briefed on national security matters before winning the election? Does this apply to rfk and the others? Seems like a terrible idea. What if an independent with foreign leanings went up to the general?
Does this apply to rfk and the others?
Being a nominee of the major party gives you special privileges.